Police beat teenagers

By Lisbeth Latham

PERTH — Police are trying to defuse community concern following television news footage of the Tactical Response Group (TRG) kicking and beating people at a birthday party on May 10.

The party, attended by 150 people, was raided after complaints from neighbours about the noise. At 1am, 20 TRG officers arrived in full riot gear. They kicked in the front door and chased party-goers through the house. Footage showed five police standing over a youth on the ground, kicking him and beating him with batons.

In mid-March, police threatened to use Section 54a of the Police Act — which allows for mass arrests — to stop all unruly parties.

An internal investigation has been launched into whether excessive force was used on May 10. However, Superintendent Lamb is reported in the West Australian as saying, "there [was] a bit of swinging but lots of the blows [were] to the limbs, which are quite legal. Overall, I think the police acted quite okay." Premier Richard Court has also defended the police: "I have seen the footage and if someone was throwing bricks at me, I couldn't guarantee what I would do with my legs."

Neighbours' fear for their safety was used as a justification for police brutality. These fears were not based on any actual threat but rather on the belief that the party could get out of hand and lead to violence.

The overwhelmingly negative portrayal of young people and their parties by Perth's media has fuelled such fears. It is ironic that the TV cameras which captured the police violence on May 10 had converged on the party to obtain more footage of "unruly youth".

From Green Left Weekly #318

Read more...

Mental Health Act increases powers of WA police

By Lisbeth Latham

PERTH — Police in Western Australia are to receive increased power to detain mentally ill individuals and seize their possessions as part of the Mental Health Act 1996, which had its second reading in the Legislative Council on November 13.

The act allows police to enter a building to apprehend a person suspected of being mentally ill and seize any items found in the possession of or near the person, without a warrant. It will require psychiatric assessment of individuals only after the fourth day of detention. These amendments, which will bring WA's legislation in line with other states, raise questions regarding the treatment of individuals suffering from mental illnesses and the civil rights of everyone.

Dr Donna Fruin, clinical psychologist and lecturer at Curtin University, expressed concern at the beliefs underlying these changes, saying, "The use of mental illness as a label is an inappropriate way to decide whether to detain an individual".

"It should be their behaviour, not their mental state, that is the criterion for detention by police, and they currently have sufficient power in this area", Fruin said.

Fruin also expressed concern that the act is an attempt to cut costs in mental health, by shifting the emphasis away from psychologists and psychiatrists trained to treat individuals with psychological problems and onto individuals untrained in the area.

Professor Don Thomson, lecturer in forensic psychology at Edith Cowan University, said, "If someone is mentally or emotionally ill, it is necessary that the individual be taken to, or is seen by, a doctor". Professor Thomson expressed concern as to whether police possessed the correct disposition or adequate training and support to make on-the-spot decisions regarding the mental health of an individual.

He also suggested that police undertake training and be exposed to the mentally ill so as to reduce fear of them. Thomson suggested that the shootings of mentally ill individuals in Victoria in the last two years were situations where such fears would be a factor.

Thomson, commenting on his experiences with the Victorian Council for Civil Liberties, expressed concern "that the bill could enable the use of the Mental Health Act to extend the criminal code". Such an extension is dangerous as the Mental Health Act has less regard for civil liberties, an example of which is the individual's not having a right to legal defence.

The extension is also a concern considering the history of the label "mentally ill" being used as means of social control. The exclusion of anti-social behaviour, sexual promiscuity, political and religious beliefs as a basis for diagnosing mental illness serves as a protection against the institutionalisation of individuals. But these exceptions do not stop an individual from being detained for the four-day period. This leaves the legislation open for abuse by the police.

The West Australian editorialised on November 13 that "it is a curious time to be giving police more powers when there are widespread concerns in the community that some officers abuse the powers they have now".

If the Mental Health Act 1996 aimed only at improving the quality of mental health, it should not have included provisions for increased police power.

From Green Left Weekly #256.

Read more...